NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

While the OFFICE of President remains in highest regard at NewEnergyNews, this administration's position on the climate crisis makes it impossible to regard THIS president with respect. Below is the NewEnergyNews theme song until 2020.

“…[TheOil and Gas Climate Initiative(OGCI), a two-year-old organization comprised of 10 major oil and gas companies, is] confronting the challenge of climate change head-on…[It] committed last October to support the Paris climate agreement’s target of capping the rise in mean global surface temperature since preindustrial times at 2 degrees Celsius by 2100, and has been working ever since to develop a plan for the industry to help advance this objective…

…[At its second Low Emission Roadmap Roundtable on Sept. 23 at the World Economic Forum in New York City, the] OGCI sought input from stakeholders as they develop practical steps for reducing the industry’s emissions. While the formal membership of the OGCI represents about 20 percent of global oil and gas production, invitations were open to a broader group of industry and environmental non-governmental organizations. To bring academic rigor to the discussion of how to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in alignment with the 2 C goal, the OGCI partnered in the roundtable with the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change…”

Roadmap To The World New Energy Future Updated

“…Remap assesses worldwide renewable energy potential assembled from the bottom up…The analysis encompasses 40 countries representing 80% of global energy use…[The 2016second edition finds] scaling up renewables is feasible and affordable, it would result in lower overall costs, save millions of lives due to lower air pollution, increase economic growth and employment, and set the world on a pathway to limiting temperature rise to 2 degree Celsius or below when combined with increased energy efficiency…[but business-as-usual] will only result in an increase of this share from 18% in 2010 to 21% by 2030…In order to achieve these benefits the renewable energy share must at least double over today’s level…”click here for more

Where In The World Better Solar Is Being Made

"Global cumulative manufacturing capacity for solar PV modules remained steady at around 70 GW between 2012 and 2015, but actual production doubled from 32 GW to 60 GW. This surge increased the margins of the top module manufacturers and tightened the supply-demand balance for the coming years. While the main players in the solar PV module market have been announcing small capacity expansions since early 2014, the number of announcements has soared since November 2015…In the long term, the niche technologies of today are expected to evolve to take over most of the solar market…According to Navigant Research, global module-level power electronics (MLPE) capacity is expected to grow from 9.7 GW in 2016 to 42.2 GW in 2025…”click here for more

Windmaker Designing Wind Storage System

“…[World-leading German wind turbine manufacturer Siemens, in partnership with the Technical University Hamburg Harburg (TUHH) and urban utility company Hamburg Energie, is] researching a storage solution…[Future Energy Solution (FES) converts excess wind energy to heat in rock fill and stores it] with an insulated cover…When there is a need for additional electricity, a steam turbine converts the heat energy back to electricity. The principle of this store promises an extremely low-cost set-up…Siemens is currently operating a test set-up…[and] researching how to make charging and discharging the store particularly efficient…The store is being tested at temperatures over 600° C…Just like a hot air gun, a fan uses an electrically-heated air flow to heat the stones to the desired temperature. When discharging, the hot stones in turn heat the air current, which then heats a steam boiler — the pressure drives a generator via a steam turbine…[The full-size FES] will generate so much steam that a Siemens compact steam turbine can generate output of up to 1.5 MW of electricity for up to 24 hours a day. The researchers expect to generate effectiveness of around 25%...”click here for more

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Mars Sees Threat To Chocolate In Climate Change

“…Mars Chocolate, the maker of candy brands like M&M, Snickers, and Dove, employs a small team of meteorologists…tasked with examining current weather patterns, then working with other departments to examine how these patterns could impact suppliers of [its] ingredients…While much of the Mars meteorologists' jobs is to focus on near-term weather forecasting, they also look months and years in the future, examining issues such as global warming…Beyond creating problems in predicting weather, climate change could be ‘devestating’ to the chocolate business, according to the nonprofit Rainforest Alliance...Climate change could render areas that were once optimal for growing cocao unusable, Climate.gov reports...Mars is working to combat climate change by reducing carbon emissions, with a pledge to cut all greenhouse gas emissions from operations by 2040…”click here for more

Wearable New Energy

“Researchers from Georgia Tech have been working on a fabric that harvests energy from both sunshine and motion, which could be used to generate power in the field.The textilecombines solar cells constructed from lightweight polymer fibres with fibre-based triboelectric nanogenerators. The nanogenerators use a combination of the triboelectric effect – a type of contact electrification – and electrostatic induction to harvest power from physical motion such as rotation, sliding or vibration…When woven together with strands of wool, the fabric is 320 micrometres thick…[T]he overall production process is low-cost and green, and the fabric could potentially be integrated into the material of tents or clothing…[In one experiments, the researchers] used a piece of fabric about A4 size and hung it from the window of a moving car…[and] were able to generate significant power, even on a cloudy day. The team also measured the output from a 4 x 5 centimetre piece of the material, which charged up a 2mF commercial capacitor to 2V in one minute using a combination of sunlight and movements…”click here for more

Picture Proof That U.S. Offshore Wind Lives

“…[Deepwater Wind’s] Block Island Wind Farm – America’s first marine-based wind farm – remains on-schedule…The final blade on the first offshore wind turbine for the farml located about 5km off the coast of Block Island, south-west of Boston, was installed on August 4.

BMW’s Used Battery Power Plant

“…Electric vehicle makers face the looming question of what to do] with all the spent batteries? One answer: turn a huge pile of them into a grid-scale power plant…[Lithium-ion batteries are continuing to fall in price and could be nearing a tipping point that will see electric-vehicle sales take off…But like any batteries, they wear out. The rate at whichthey currently decline [to where a car’s range would be depleted] puts their lifetime for powering electric vehicles in the neighborhood of eight to 10 years…[BMW’s just-completed grid-scale storage facility in Hamburg, Germany, will use batteries from 100 cars to store 2.8 megawatt-hours of energy and deliver] up to two megawatts of power [to the grid during times of peak demand] at the flip of a switch…”click here for more

Editor’s note: Since this piece ran, California's work on a regional electricity market has continued to move ahead in measured steps.

Caifornia's electric system operator wants to organize the West’s 38 individual balancing authority areas (BAAs) into a market richer in resources than any in the U.S. and is working to answer crucial questions about who will pay, who will benefit, and what kinds of energy the system will carry. California’s landmark Senate Bill 350 ordered the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) to do studies to answer the questions. The concept of regional markets emerged in the mid-to-late 1990s when, led by the Clinton Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, power pools like PJM and ISO-New England were formalized. A national discussion about organized markets' efficiencies followed. The West’s BAAs are now beginning to see variability increasing on their systems and are beginning to understand the region’s resource and demand diversity can make dispatch more flexible and efficient.

A Western region energy market would use the same CA ISO technology to coordinate electricity systems across the West and take full advantage of the region’s renewable resources and, though some environmentalists argue otherwise, create disincentives to send coal-generated energy to California. It would also allow system operators to do more advanced planning and give them increased situational awareness that would lead to lower cost power purchasing and savings to ratepayers, according to preliminary results from independent studies… click here for more

The plummeting price of battery energy storage could prove to have just as much to do with the components of the storage system as it does with the cost of the battery, according to Grid-Scale Energy Storage Balance of Systems 2015-2020: Architectures, Costs and Players. The 15 to 20 different items in the balance of the system (BOS) represent one-half to three-fourths of the installation’s cost. Those costs are likely to plummet over the next five years – if the growth of storage deployment continues.

The researchers assumed $350/kWh for the battery cost, an aggressive number based on the performance of industry leaders Samsung and LG and the Panasonic-Tesla product. For an installation intended to supply energy with a two-hour duration battery, BOS would be about half the total project cost. But for a project intended to supply power with a half-hour duration battery, BOS is almost three-fourths of the installation’s cost. And continued growth of battery storage to drive this drop in the BOS cost is likely. This is part of the pattern that drove solar to its record low cost over the last three years… click here for more

Spruce Finance is growing and expanding its private sector work as a complement or competitor to utility business models. It offers power company customers a full suite of distributed energy resources (DER). It is left to utilities whether those technologies sustain customers’ relationship with their electricity providers as a trusted energy advisor or give them the independence to move away from their power companies. Consumers now get up to three utility bills — one for heating, another for electricity, and a third for water, explained CEO Nat Kreamer.

Helping customers afford the hardware that allows them to reduce their total bill — such as new insulation, new HVAC units, a smart thermostat, LED lights, or a rooftop solar system — is where Spruce comes in. For the full spectrum of consumer technologies offered by its vendor partners, Spruce offers a diverse set of financing options, including loans, leases, and power purchase agreements. Consumers don’t necessarily know what they are paying for each of the three portions of their utility bill, Kreamer said, but they want to save money on the whole thing. Total bill savings is what Spruce targets. Many utilities can take advantage of Spruce’s offerings but others may choose to compete... click here for more

It reveals a spectrum of approaches to incorporating DPV across nine key planning areas, and it identifies areas where even the best current practices might be enhanced.

1) Forecasting DPV deployment: Because it explicitly captures several predictive factors, customer-adoption modeling is the most comprehensive forecasting approach. It could be combined with other forecasting methods to generate a range of potential futures.

2) Ensuring robustness of decisions to uncertain DPV quantities: using a capacity-expansion model to develop least-cost plans for various scenarios accounts for changes in net load and the generation portfolio; an innovative variation of this approach combines multiple per-scenario plans with trigger events, which indicate when conditions have changed sufficiently from the expected to trigger modifications in resource-acquisition strategy.

3) Characterizing DPV as a resource option: Today’s most comprehensive plans account for all of DPV’s monetary costs and benefits. An enhanced approach would address non-monetary and societal impacts as well.

4) Incorporating the non-dispatchability of DPV into planning: Rather than having a distinct innovative practice, innovation in this area is represented by evolving methods for capturing this important aspect of DPV.

6) Estimating DPV’s impact on transmission and distribution investments: Innovative practices are being implemented to evaluate system needs, hosting capacities, and system investments needed to accommodate DPV deployment.

7) Estimating avoided losses associated with DPV: A time-differentiated marginal loss rate provides the most comprehensive estimate of avoided losses due to DPV, but no studies appear to use it.

8) Considering changes in DPV’s value with higher solar penetration: Innovative methods for addressing the value changes at high solar penetrations are lacking among the studies we evaluate.

9) Integrating DPV in planning across generation, transmission, and distribution: A few states and regions have started to develop more comprehensive processes that link planning forums, but there are still many issues to address.

Analysts project that distributed solar photovoltaics (DPV) will continue growing rapidly across the United States.1 This growth has critical implications for utility planning processes, potentially affecting the size and type of future infrastructure needs as well as the solution set for meeting those needs. Developing appropriate techniques for incorporating DPV’s unique characteristics into utility planning processes—across generation, transmission, and distribution—is therefore essential to ensuring reliable operation of the electric system at least cost. It is also paramount to ensuring that the costs and benefits of DPV resources are fully and accurately valued, because that value may derive in large part from investments that utilities make or avoid owing to needs identified within their planning studies.

With this report, we seek to inform utility planning through a comparative analysis of roughly 30 recent utility integrated resource plans or other generation planning studies, transmission planning studies, and distribution system plans. The rapid growth of DPV has not been distributed equally across U.S. utility territories, and the same is true for projected future growth. While some of the studies we review forecast 2020 DPV penetrations equivalent to 5% or more of retail sales, fewer than half consider penetrations beyond 1% by 2020. Thus it is unsurprising that utilities and other planning organizations have differed in their perceptions about the need to incorporate DPV into resource and transmission and distribution (T&D) plans. Because of this staggered progress, organizations that are just beginning to address DPV can draw on innovative practices from organizations that already are incorporating DPV rigorously into their plans. Our report reveals this spectrum of approaches across nine key planning areas, and it identifies areas where even the best current practices might be enhanced.

Below we summarize current practices and highlight approaches that are innovative and potentially worthy of emulation. We conclude with a brief discussion of future work.

The main forecasting approaches across the studies we analyze include stipulated forecast, historical trend, program-based approach, and customer-adoption modeling. About 70% of relevant studies employ one or more of the first three approaches, which rely on few or no quantifiable predictive factors. In contrast, customer-adoption modeling explicitly uses historical DPV deployment, location-specific DPV technical potential, various DPV economic considerations, and end-user behaviors as predictive factors (Figure ES-1). A quarter of the studies use this innovative method, including those by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, PacifiCorp, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Puget Sound Energy (PSE), and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council. Though our analysis suggests various ways to improve current customer-adoption models, these models represent the most comprehensive forecasting approach available today.

The quantities and ranges of DPV deployment forecasted in the studies we analyze vary by region, utility, and forecasting method (Figure ES-2). A number of utilities use only a single DPV forecast or consider only a small range. Stipulated forecasts generally have the largest ranges, whereas program-based forecasts tend to have small ranges, and the high end of thirdparty forecasts is above the high end of utility planning forecasts about two thirds of the time. Our analysis suggests that combining various DPV forecasting methods could be valuable. Such an approach might use program goals discounted for uncertainty as lower bounds, customeradoption models to forecast expected levels, and third-party forecasts and stipulated what-if scenarios to explore the full range of plausible futures.

Robustness of decisions to uncertainty in DPV adoption is most clearly addressed in utility integrated resource planning, with some consideration in transmission planning and little in distribution planning. The relevant studies we review use one of three methods to address uncertainty: single forecast (33% of studies), subject to sensitivity (11%), and per-scenario plan (56%). The per-scenario plan method often uses a capacity-expansion model (CEM) to develop least-cost plans for various scenarios, including different levels of DPV adoption (Figure ES-3). Because it accounts for changes in both net load and the generation portfolio, this is the most comprehensive of the three methods. An innovative variation of this approach—acquisition path analysis—combines multiple per-scenario plans with trigger events, which indicate when conditions have changed sufficiently from the expected to trigger modifications in resourceacquisition strategy. PacifiCorp and Hawaiian Electric Companies (HECO) use variations of this approach in their resource planning.

Characterizing DPV as a Resource Option

Fewer than half of the studies we review evaluate DPV as a resource that could be proactively deployed to meet future needs. Those that do consider DPV as a resource use various approaches to determine if it should be part of the plan. The two most common are to compare the performance of candidate portfolios with varying quantities of DPV and to develop minimumcost portfolios via CEMs with DPV as a resource option. Regardless of the characterization method used, the ways DPV is distinguished from other resource options are important. Some utilities dismiss DPV based only on its higher cost and lower capacity factor relative to utilityscale PV (UPV). However, DPV’s capacity credit as well as the avoided losses, transmission deferrals, and distribution-system cost impact associated with DPV also can be significant (Table ES-1). PG&E’s plan stands alone among the utility resource plans we review in accounting for all these factors, which are also important for the locational net benefits methodology in the California Distribution Resources Plans and the New York Reforming the Energy Vision (NY REV) process.

Rather than a distinct innovative practice for incorporating the non-dispatchability of DPV in planning, innovation in this area is represented by evolving methods for capturing this important aspect of DPV. Hourly DPV generation profiles allow for some potential integration issues to be included when evaluating portfolios with DPV, including multi-hour ramping impacts and overgeneration. Most planning studies in our sample appear to use an hourly DPV profile. Impacts of DPV that are not captured with hourly generation profiles, such as sub-hourly variability and uncertainty, can be addressed through detailed integration studies. Various studies quantify the operational integration costs of solar, suggesting a range of $0.5–$10/MWh (for all solar, not just DPV). The methods used to estimate DPV’s capacity credit vary and are not always described. A few utilities use detailed reliability-based models to estimate DPV’s effective load-carrying capability, whereas others use less-rigorous methods to estimate capacity credit. Among the other integration-related issues discussed in the studies, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) highlights the overgeneration potential of low-load spring days and considers mitigation via electric vehicle (EV) charging during these periods. Combining hourly DPV profiles with detailed production cost models can help in evaluating the role of EVs and other technologies and in identifying times when overgeneration may be a concern.

Accounting for Location-Specific Factors of DPV

Transmission and distribution planning studies require projections of DPV locations. We identify three methods for estimating future locations: proportional to load (40% of relevant studies), proportional to existing DPV (40%), and propensity to adopt (30%). 2 The first two methods proportionally allocate DPV deployment based on the locations of existing load, population, or DPV. The propensity-to-adopt method employs additional predictive factors as well, such as demographics and customer load. Utilities that use this innovative analysis include PG&E, Southern California Edison, and Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Another emerging utility innovation is locating DPV strategically to enhance its benefits. Organizations exploring this tactic include Duke Energy Indiana, Dominion, PG&E, Georgia Power Company, and ISO New England—generally focusing on utility-owned systems. A recent pilot project in Rhode Island demonstrates how promotion of strategic locations for behind-the-meter DPV can help defer feeder upgrades.

Innovations in estimating the impact of DPV on T&D investments apply differently to different organizations, depending on each organization’s current progress in this area as well as its projected DPV deployment and the robustness of its T&D infrastructure. For organizations that have not yet considered DPV in T&D studies, innovative examples of such planning are available from numerous planning entities. Likewise, organizations that find themselves needing to calculate hosting capacity—the amount of DPV that can be interconnected to the distribution system without violating operating limits—can draw on innovative studies from their peers. These include the use of hosting capacity analysis to both screen and steer the location of DPV. At the most advanced end of the spectrum, some organizations are already proactively planning investments to accommodate additional DPV. Innovative analyses by Pepco, Dominion/Navigant, and HECO calculate the cost of various options for increasing hosting capacity, including the impacts of advanced inverters and energy storage.

Estimating the Avoided Losses Associated with DPV

Of the studies we review that mention avoided losses due to DPV and provide sufficient detail, we observe three methods to account for these losses: average loss rate (60% of studies), timedifferentiated average loss rate (30%), and detailed analysis of losses (10%). Because of the nonlinear variation of line losses with load, the most comprehensive estimation of system losses— and thus the potential avoided losses with DPV—is a time-differentiated marginal loss rate. However, none of the studies we evaluate appear to use a marginal loss calculation. This represents an area for future innovation. The one detailed circuit-level analysis of losses, by PSE, offers a different refinement at a relatively small scale.

Considering Changes in Costs and Benefits of DPV with Higher Solar Penetration

Perhaps because few utilities expect high penetrations of solar in the near future, innovative methods for addressing the value changes at such penetrations are lacking among the studies we evaluate. Georgia Power Company’s avoided cost of DPV calculations estimate the incremental avoided cost for tranches of DPV, though some details are redacted. Many utilities employ production cost models, and these tools can be used to show changes with increasing solar penetration. CEMs could also account for changes in the costs and benefits of DPV with higher penetration, though some models may need to be modified to account for changes in the capacity credit with higher penetration. In addition, none of the studies mention changes in avoided losses with higher solar penetration.

One complicating factor is that the change in value with penetration may depend on other external factors. LADWP, for example, highlights that EV charging during the day may mitigate some of the challenges with overgeneration. Customer adoption of EVs and their preferences for charging the EVs may therefore affect the value of DPV at high penetration. Given uncertainty in how customer preferences and other factors may change over time, scenario analysis and analysis of the robustness of decisions may be helpful to decision makers.

Integrating DPV in Planning across Generation, Transmission, and Distribution

Fully integrating DPV into planning requires a more comprehensive approach in which distribution, transmission, and resource planning are more tightly linked. A few states and regions—including California, New York, and New England—have started to develop these more comprehensive processes, but there are still many issues to address. Understanding the range of different approaches across the United States and highlighting innovative practices should help accelerate those changes.
Future Research

With future research, we will analyze whether some of the innovative practices identified here can meaningfully affect planning study results. Of particular interest are innovative practices for forecasting DPV adoption, examining the robustness of decisions to DPV uncertainty, and considering DPV as a resource.

Despite an almost isolated case referenced by Donald Trump in the first presidential debate, the federal investments in solar and other cutting edge energies have paid off far better than any portfolio of private sector investments, according to the Department of Energy update made as the program went into hiatus in 2014.

“LPO currently manages a portfolio comprising more than $30 billion of loans, loan guarantees, and conditional commitments covering more than 30 projects. These projects include some of the world’s most innovative and largest solar, wind, geothermal, biofuel, and nuclear facilities, as well as advanced technology vehicle manufacturing facilities in six states producing some of America’s best-selling vehicles. Overall, these loans and loan guarantees have resulted in more than $50 billion in total project investment,” the update reports.

In September 2014, LPO-financed projects have moved solar and other technologies that might not have come to market if they had to depend solely on private sector investment. They had repaid nearly $3.5 billion of principal and earned over $810 million in interest payments. The interest payments largely come in on or ahead of schedule and will eventually earn the federal government an estimated $5 billion-plus in interest. Losses at the time of the update were less than $780 million, less than 3.6% of the total money loaned. click here for more

“Xcel Energy plans to invest $2 billion to expand its wind-generation capacity by 60 percent, enough to power 750,000 homes…Already a national leader in wind energy, Xcel Energy plans to add eight to 10 wind farms that will serve Minnesota, the Dakotas, Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Together, they will provide about 1,500 megawatts of power…That’s almost as much as the 1,600 megawatts of power produced by Xcel’s two Minnesota nuclear facilities…Xcel will own some of the new wind farms and buy power from wind farms developed by independent operators…The new wind farms should come online between 2017 and 2020…By 2030, Xcel expects one-third of its power generation in the Upper Midwest will come from renewable sources — mostly wind — up from 24 percent now…Nuclear will make up about one-third…[and coal is expected to fall from its current 33 percent] to 15 percent…”click here for more

“On August 11 a bid of US$0.46/W was put forward to build 500MW of solar power in China (a roughly calculated levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) at $0.019/kWh). This past week we saw a bid of $0.023/kWh to build 1.2GW of solar power in Abu Dhabi…almost 25% lower than the $0.0299/kWh was bid in late April for a series of projects also in Abu Dhabi. These extremely aggressive price falls are partially driven by unique situations – a Chinese solar panel production glut and historically low costs of money. But also because of technology…The price drop in solar panels from the first quarter through the third quarter of this year is probably the greatest driver…Anecdotally, deliveries of Tier 1 solar panels in 1MW volume to the northeast USA have fallen from ~$0.60-65/W to ~$0.45/W – price declines of 25-30%...Other locations have seen price falls just as significant. A Nevada USA 100MW solar project was recently approved delivering electricity at $0.04/kWh. Chile set temporary records at $0.0291/kWh. And now we see India’s ongoing, and upward ramping, solar power boom…Greentech Media made a now quaint seeming prediction that solar costs would fall “40% by 2020” in September of 2015 – little did they know it might happen before the end of 2016…”click here for more

Monday, September 26, 2016

TODAY’S STUDY: The Future Of Offshore Wind Foreseen

Offshore wind energy holds the promise of significant environmental and economic benefits for the United States. It is an abundant, low-carbon, domestic energy resource. It is located close to major coastal load centers, providing an alternative to long-distance transmission or development of electricity generation in these land-constrained regions. Once built, offshore wind farms could produce energy at low, long-term fixed costs, which can reduce electricity prices and improve energy security by providing a hedge against fossil fuel price volatility.

Realizing these benefits will require overcoming critical challenges in three strategic themes: 1) reducing the costs and technical risks associated with domestic offshore wind development, 2) supporting stewardship of U.S. waters by providing regulatory certainty and understanding and mitigating environmental risks of offshore wind development, and 3) increasing understanding of the benefits and costs of offshore wind energy.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), through its Wind Energy Technologies Office, and U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), through its Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), have jointly produced this updated national strategy to facilitate the responsible development of offshore wind energy in the United States. In doing so, the agencies accounted for progress made since the last national offshore wind strategy released in 2011, and utilized significant input from the offshore wind community. This strategy highlights the gaps that need to be addressed by the offshore wind community as a whole, and provides a suite of actions that DOE and DOI are positioned to undertake to address these gaps and help the nation realize the benefits of offshore wind development.

The United States Needs a National Approach to Offshore Wind Development

The national energy landscape has changed significantly since the first national strategy for offshore wind was released in 2011. The first domestic offshore wind farm is scheduled for commercial operation in 2016, and there are now 11 active commercial leases along the Atlantic Coast. The United States took steps toward a low-carbon future through its commitments at the Paris Climate Conference, the promulgation of the Clean Power Plan,1 and legislative action, such as the extension of the renewable energy production tax credit and investment tax credit. Coastal states have increased their demand for renewable energy deployment through renewable portfolio standards and other mandates. Many legacy fossil fuel, nuclear, and renewable generators are set to retire because of age, cost, or as part of the move toward lower-carbon sources of electricity. Land-based wind energy generation in the United States has increased nearly 60% and utility-scale solar generation increased more than 1,300% [1] relative to 2011.

Most of this renewable generation is located far from coastal load centers, and long-distance transmission infrastructure has not kept pace with this rapid deployment. At the same time, the offshore wind market has matured rapidly in Europe, and costs are now falling. These trends suggest that offshore wind has the opportunity to play a substantial role as a source of domestic, large-scale, affordable electricity for the nation.

DOE and DOI developed this strategy as a joint document and have a single overarching goal in its implementation, which is to facilitate the development of a robust and sustainable offshore wind industry in the United States. The agencies will coordinate on the implementation of many of the specific actions they intend to undertake to support achievement of this goal. In recognition of their unique and complementary roles, and consistent with their missions and authorities, DOE and DOI each identified the actions they plan to address, and set individual objectives against which they will measure progress. These objectives are as follows:

• DOE aims to reduce the levelized cost of energy through technological advancement to compete with local electricity costs, and create the conditions necessary to support DOE’s Wind Vision2 study scenario levels [2] of deployment by supporting the coexistence of offshore wind with the environment, coastal communities, and other users of ocean space.

• DOI aims to enhance its regulatory program to ensure that oversight processes are well-informed and adaptable, avoid unnecessary burdens, and provide transparency and certainty for the regulated community and stakeholders.

DOE and DOI solicited significant stakeholder and public input to inform this document through a DOE Request for Information and a DOI Request for Feedback, as well as a jointly hosted public workshop. Feedback received through these efforts was critical to DOI and DOE in defining the challenges facing offshore wind presented in this document, as well as suggesting potential federal actions to address them.

A number of factors demonstrate the realistic and substantial opportunity that offshore wind presents to the United States:

• U.S. offshore wind resources are abundant. Today, a technical potential of 2,058 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind resource capacity are accessible in U.S. waters using existing technology. This is equivalent to an energy output of 7,200 terawatt-hours per year— enough to provide nearly double the total electric generation of the United States in 2015.

• Significant siting and development opportunities are available today in U.S. waters. By the end of 2015, DOI had awarded 11 commercial leases for offshore wind development that could support a total of 14.6 GW of capacity in areas already vetted for preliminary siting conflicts through extensive intergovernmental and stakeholder coordination. BOEM has a number of potential wind areas that are currently in the planning stages.

• Electricity demand growth and scheduled power plant retirements in coastal states provide significant opportunity for offshore wind development. If the 86 GW of offshore wind studied in the Wind Vision study scenario3 were developed by 2050, offshore wind would make up 14% of the projected demand for new electricity generation in the coastal and Great Lakes states.

• In some locations, offshore wind could be competitive with incumbent forms of generation in the next decade. A new cost analysis by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory shows credible scenarios for cost reductions below $100/megawatt-hour by 2025 in some areas of the United States, and more widely around the country by 2030.

Assuming near-term deployment of offshore wind at a scale sufficient to support market competition and the growth of a supply chain, development of offshore wind energy in markets with relatively high electricity costs, such as the Northeast, could be cost-competitive within a decade.

• Deploying offshore wind could lead to significant electrical system benefits for system operators, utilities, and ratepayers. Because of its low marginal costs of production and the fact that offshore winds in many regions tend to be strong at times of peak demand, offshore wind energy can lower wholesale electricity prices in many markets. Offshore wind can also decrease transmission congestion and reduce the need for new long-distance transmission.

– Decreased air pollution from other emissions. The United States could save $2 billion in avoided mortality, morbidity, and economic damages from cumulative reductions in emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and fine particulates.

– Reduced water consumption. The electric power sector could reduce water consumption by 5% and water withdrawals by 3%.

– Increased economic development and employment. Deployment could support $440 million in annual lease payments into the U.S. Treasury and approximately $680 million in annual property tax payments, as well as support approximately 160,000 gross jobs in coastal regions and around the country [2]. 4

To support a robust and sustainable offshore wind industry in the United States, challenges across three strategic themes need to be overcome.

• Reducing costs and technology risks. Today, the cost of offshore wind energy is too high to compete in most U.S. markets without subsidies. However, continued global market growth and research and development investments across the following three action areas could significantly reduce the costs of offshore wind toward competitive levels:

– Offshore wind power resource and site characterization. A better understanding of the unique meteorological, ocean, and seafloor conditions across U.S. offshore wind development sites will allow for optimized designs, reduced capital costs, greater safety, and less uncertainty in preconstruction energy estimates, resulting in reduced financing costs.

– Offshore wind plant technology advancement. Increasing turbine size and efficiency, reducing mass in substructures, and optimizing wind plants at a systems level for unique U.S. conditions can reduce capital costs and operating expenses and increase energy production at a given site.

– Installation, operation and maintenance, and supply chain solutions. The complexity and risk associated with installation and operation and maintenance activities requires specialized infrastructure that does not yet exist in the United States. Reducing or eliminating the need for specialized assets, along with leveraging the nation’s existing infrastructure, will reduce capital and operating costs in the near term and help unlock major economic development and job creation opportunities in the long term.

• Supporting effective stewardship. Effective stewardship of the nation’s ocean and Great Lakes resources will be necessary to allow for the development of a sustainable offshore wind industry in the United States. DOI, through BOEM, oversees the responsible development of energy on the Outer Continental Shelf. Offshore wind developers, financiers, and power purchasers need confidence in a project’s ability to navigate regulatory and environmental compliance requirements in a predictable way. To improve this balance and support effective stewardship, action is needed in the following two areas:

– Ensuring efficiency, consistency, and clarity in the regulatory process. Further work can be done to improve consistency and identify and reduce unnecessary burdens in BOEM’s existing regulatory process. This may include establishing more predictable review timelines and maintaining a reasonable level of flexibility given the early stage of the industry’s development.

– Managing key environmental and human-use concerns. More data need to be collected to verify and validate the impacts of offshore wind development on sensitive biological resources and existing human uses of ocean space. Improved understanding and further collaboration will allow for increased efficiency of environmental reviews and tighter focus on the most important issues.

• Increasing understanding of the benefits and costs of offshore wind. Building a better understanding of the impacts of offshore wind on the electricity grid, unique electricity market costs and benefits, and environmental externalities can help create the conditions needed for near-term deployment.

– Offshore wind electricity delivery and grid integration. Impacts of significant offshore wind deployment on grids need to be better understood at state and regional levels, and the costs and benefits associated with different offshore transmission infrastructure configurations and strategies need to be characterized.

– Quantifying and communicating the benefits and costs of offshore wind. The environmental and economic benefits and costs associated with offshore wind need to be quantified and communicated to key stakeholders to inform decisions on near-term offtake agreements, other project-specific matters, and policies affecting offshore wind.

Federal government action can supplement the work of states, utilities, the wind industry, the environmental community, researchers, and other stakeholders to facilitate offshore wind development. DOE and DOI aim to provide essential federal leadership to help overcome certain challenges and help the nation to realize the benefits of offshore wind. This strategy lays out 34 concrete actions in seven action areas that DOE and DOI can take to facilitate responsible, robust, and sustainable offshore wind development in the United States.

Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that will ReCharge America by Sherry Boschert: "Smart companies plan ahead and try to be the first to adopt new technology that will give them a competitive advantage. That’s what Toyota and Honda did with hybrids, and now they’re sitting pretty. Whichever company is first to bring a good plug-in hybrid to market will not only change their fortune but change the world."

Oil On The Brain; Adventures from the Pump to the Pipeline by Lisa Margonelli: "Spills are one of the costs of oil consumption that don’t appear at the pump. [Oil consultant Dagmar Schmidt Erkin]’s data shows that 120 million gallons of oil were spilled in inland waters between 1985 and 2003. From that she calculates that between 1980 and 2003, pipelines spilled 27 gallons of oil for every billion “ton miles” of oil they transported, while barges and tankers spilled around 15 gallons and trucks spilled 37 gallons. (A ton of oil is 294 gallons. If you ship a ton of oil for one mile you have one ton mile.) Right now the United States ships about 900 billion ton miles of oil and oil products per year."

NOTEWORTHY IN THE MEDIA:
NewEnergyNews would welcome any media-saavy volunteer who would like to re-develop this section of the page. Announcements and reviews of film, television, radio and music related to energy and environmental issues are welcome.

Review of OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The American Decades by Mark S. Friedman

OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The American Decades, the second volume of Herman K. Trabish’s retelling of oil’s history in fiction, picks up where the first book in the series, OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The Story of Our Addiction, left off. The new book is an engrossing, informative and entertaining tale of the Roaring 20s, World War II and the Cold War. You don’t have to know anything about the first historical fiction’s adventures set between the Civil War, when oil became a major commodity, and World War I, when it became a vital commodity, to enjoy this new chronicle of the U.S. emergence as a world superpower and a world oil power.

As the new book opens, Lefash, a minor character in the first book, witnesses the role Big Oil played in designing the post-Great War world at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Unjustly implicated in a murder perpetrated by Big Oil agents, LeFash takes the name Livingstone and flees to the U.S. to clear himself. Livingstone’s quest leads him through Babe Ruth’s New York City and Al Capone’s Chicago into oil boom Oklahoma. Stymied by oil and circumstance, Livingstone marries, has a son and eventually, surprisingly, resolves his grievances with the murderer and with oil.

In the new novel’s second episode the oil-and-auto-industry dynasty from the first book re-emerges in the charismatic person of Victoria Wade Bridger, “the woman everybody loved.” Victoria meets Saudi dynasty founder Ibn Saud, spies for the State Department in the Vichy embassy in Washington, D.C., and – for profound and moving personal reasons – accepts a mission into the heart of Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe. Underlying all Victoria’s travels is the struggle between the allies and axis for control of the crucial oil resources that drove World War II.

As the Cold War begins, the novel’s third episode recounts the historic 1951 moment when Britain’s MI-6 handed off its operations in Iran to the CIA, marking the end to Britain’s dark manipulations and the beginning of the same work by the CIA. But in Trabish’s telling, the covert overthrow of Mossadeq in favor of the ill-fated Shah becomes a compelling romance and a melodramatic homage to the iconic “Casablanca” of Bogart and Bergman.

Monty Livingstone, veteran of an oil field youth, European WWII combat and a star-crossed post-war Berlin affair with a Russian female soldier, comes to 1951 Iran working for a U.S. oil company. He re-encounters his lost Russian love, now a Soviet agent helping prop up Mossadeq and extend Mother Russia’s Iranian oil ambitions. The reunited lovers are caught in a web of political, religious and Cold War forces until oil and power merge to restore the Shah to his future fate. The romance ends satisfyingly, America and the Soviet Union are the only forces left on the world stage and ambiguity is resolved with the answer so many of Trabish’s characters ultimately turn to: Oil.

Commenting on a recent National Petroleum Council report calling for government subsidies of the fossil fuels industries, a distinguished scholar said, “It appears that the whole report buys these dubious arguments that the consumer of energy is somehow stupid about energy…” Trabish’s great and important accomplishment is that you cannot read his emotionally engaging and informative tall tales and remain that stupid energy consumer. With our world rushing headlong toward Peak Oil and epic climate change, the OIL IN THEIR BLOOD series is a timely service as well as a consummate literary performance.

Review of OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The Story of Our Addiction by Mark S. Friedman

"...ours is a culture of energy illiterates." (Paul Roberts, THE END OF OIL)

OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, a superb new historical fiction by Herman K. Trabish, addresses our energy illiteracy by putting the development of our addiction into a story about real people, giving readers a chance to think about how our addiction happened. Trabish's style is fine, straightforward storytelling and he tells his stories through his characters.

The book is the answer an oil family's matriarch gives to an interviewer who asks her to pass judgment on the industry. Like history itself, it is easier to tell stories about the oil industry than to judge it. She and Trabish let readers come to their own conclusions.

She begins by telling the story of her parents in post-Civil War western Pennsylvania, when oil became big business. This part of the story is like a John Ford western and its characters are classic American melodramatic heroes, heroines and villains.

In Part II, the matriarch tells the tragic story of the second generation and reveals how she came to be part of the tales. We see oil become an international commodity, traded on Wall Street and sought from London to Baku to Mesopotamia to Borneo. A baseball subplot compares the growth of the oil business to the growth of baseball, a fascinating reflection of our current president's personal career.

There is an unforgettable image near the center of the story: International oil entrepreneurs talk on a Baku street. This is Trabish at his best, portraying good men doing bad and bad men doing good, all laying plans for wealth and power in the muddy, oily alley of a tiny ancient town in the middle of everywhere. Because Part I was about triumphant American heroes, the tragedy here is entirely unexpected, despite Trabish's repeated allusions to other stories (Casey At The Bat, Hamlet) that do not end well.

In the final section, World War I looms. Baseball takes a back seat to early auto racing and oil-fueled modernity explodes. Love struggles with lust. A cavalry troop collides with an army truck. Here, Trabish has more than tragedy in mind. His lonely, confused young protagonist moves through the horrible destruction of the Romanian oilfields only to suffer worse and worse horrors, until--unexpectedly--he finds something, something a reviewer cannot reveal. Finally, the question of oil must be settled, so the oil industry comes back into the story in a way that is beyond good and bad, beyond melodrama and tragedy.

Along the way, Trabish gives readers a greater awareness of oil and how we became addicted to it. Awareness, Paul Roberts said in THE END OF OIL, "...may be the first tentative step toward building a more sustainable energy economy. Or it may simply mean that when our energy system does begin to fail, and we begin to lose everything that energy once supplied, we won't be so surprised."

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.